Evernote has serious flaws with its UI and User Experience

 Despite  the  EmailFactory’s  reliance  on  Evernote  as  a  tool,  they  readily  admit  it’s  not  perfect,   and  they’ve  often  struggled  against  the  flaws  to  its  user  interface.  Notes  disappear,  randomly  get   deleted  or  overwritten,  and  lengthy  audio  files  erase  their  content  for  no  apparent  reason.  Security   also  became  an  issue,  because  links  to  individual  files  can  only  be  shared  if  the  files  are  made   public—accessible  to  anyone  online.  Sharing  notebooks  (Evernote’s  main  filing  system,  analogous  to   folders  on  a  desktop)  is  a  confusing  process  and  more  than  once  a  researcher  thought  the  rest  of  the   team  had  access  to  his  or  her  project  notebook  when  they  didn’t.    

Figure  3.2  Everonte's  limited  search   field  options    

The  entire  app  is  littered  with  little  quirks  and  bugs  that  make  it  tiresome  to  use  at  times  and   clearly  demonstrates  that  Evernote  doesn’t  routinely  use  their  own  product.  Evernote  has  grown  to   over  75  million  users  since  its  first  beta-­‐test  release  in  2008  (King).  Yet  they  haven’t  managed  to   work  out  some  of  the  fundamental  kinks  in  its  system.  It  became  a  running  joke  among  the  UX  group   at  the  EmailFactory  that  Evernote  was  too  concerned  with  selling  socks  (priced  at  $85  for  five  pairs)   on  their  newly  released  Evernote  Market  than  they  were  about  creating  good  design.    

Despite  its  flaws,  Evernote  has  helped  the  UX  team  pull  together  related  information  from  multiple   sources.  What  it’s  not  good  at,  however,  is  helping  them  piece  all  of  that  information  into  a  meaningful   story  that  can  be  used  and  acted  upon.  It’s  also  not  very  good  at  helping  them  uncover  important  trends   or  topics  that  they  aren’t  specifically  looking  for.  Finally,  even  if  they  do  know  what  they’re  looking  for   and  they  actually  have  the  capabilities  of  making  meaning  from  it  all,  what  if  they  don’t  have  the  time?     Communicating  Research  Internally  

One  UX  designer,  Ron,  described  his  feeling  of  working  with  the  amount  of  data  at  the   EmailFactory  like  “trying  to  drink  from  a  fire  hydrant.”  At  times,  the  volume  of  information  is  so  great   that  it  is  difficult  to  use  constructively,  and  it  becomes  paralyzing  rather  than  inspiring.  Here  is  where   the  research  team’s  role  switches  from  data  gatherers  to  information  distributors.  Once  a  research   project  is  complete,  the  UX  team  condenses  their  findings,  pulls  out  the  most  valuable  pieces,  and   passes  it  along  to  the  people  in  the  company  who  need  it.    

Communicating  research  effectively  is  a  difficult  job.  Good  teachers  understand  that  a  classroom   full  of  students  represents  a  wide  range  of  learning  styles.  Some  students  learn  best  on  their  own,  with   time  to  dive  into  the  material,  coming  up  for  air  only  occasionally  for  clarification  or  questions.  Other   students  need  to  hear  someone  explain  a  concept  to  them  and  can  absorb  information  best  by  listening.   Still  other  students  can  only  learn  by  doing,  and  they  have  to  interact  with  someone  or  something  in  

order  to  fully  grasp  concepts.  Good  teachers  try  to  adapt  their  teaching  styles  to  the  needs  of  their   students  and  communicate  the  course  material  in  ways  that  make  it  possible  for  all  (willing)  students  to   succeed.  The  job  of  a  UX  research  should  be  very  similar.  The  UX  researcher  gives  voice  to  the  data,   communicating  it  in  ways  that  other  people  can  understand,  learn  from,  and  use  to  improve  upon  a   design.    

Like  a  good  teacher,  a  good  UX  researcher  understands  that  all  of  their  colleagues  don’t  absorb   information  in  the  same  ways.  Though  they  might  not  be  consciously  aware  of  it,  this  particular  part  of   their  job  is  extremely  dependent  upon  the  rhetorical  principles  of  audience,  context,  and  purpose.  They   are  tasked  with  presenting  research  in  the  best  way  possible  for  their  audience  (colleagues),  using   whatever  means  available  to  them.  They  also  have  to  work  within  the  constraints  of  their  current   situation,  such  as  time  and  resources  (context).  Finally,  they  must  do  all  this  with  the  focused  goal  of   creating  some  kind  of  positive  change  in  the  app,  as  a  result  of  the  research  they  present  (purpose).  

Understanding  the  Researchers’  Primary  Audience    

In-­‐house  User  Experience  research  is  a  tricky  business.  To  be  good  at  it—really  good  at  it,  a   person  has  to  not  only  understand  the  product’s  users,  he  or  she  has  to  understand  the  product’s   creators,  the  people  who  give  life  to  the  service  and  its  design.  What  is  important  to  them?  What  other   projects  are  they  working  on?  It  takes  an  understanding  of  audience  to  communicate  a  message  clearly,   but  how  often  do  researchers  take  the  time  to  get  to  know  their  colleagues?  How  often  do  they  have  (or   take)  the  opportunity  to  move  throughout  the  office  and  work  with  them?  How  regularly  do  they  sit  and   have  coffee  with  the  designers  and  ask  what  they’re  working  on?  How  common  is  it  to  see  researchers   and  developers  grabbing  lunch  together  and  talking  about  the  project  their  teams  are  working  on?  You   can’t  force  relationships  to  develop,  but  you  can  create  environments  that  encourage  people  to  talk  and  

connect,  which  is  what  the  EmailFactory  does.  The  company-­‐wide  lunches,  the  centrally  located  coffee   machines  and  kitchens,  and  the  open  office  spaces  all  invite  these  connections  and  interaction.    

As  a  researcher,  it’s  easy  to  cloister  yourself,  furiously  researching  and  learning  about  customers   and  the  product.  In  Susan  Cain’s  book,  she  describes  the  quiet,  introspective  “introverted”  types  as   those  “drawn  to  the  inner  world  of  thought  and  feeling”  who  “focus  on  the  meaning  they  make  of  the   events  swirling  around  them”  (Kindle  loc.  295).  Deep-­‐thinking  and  reflective  people  often  gravitate  to   research  jobs,  but  unchecked,  their  introversion  can  isolate  them  from  their  colleagues  around  them.  I   admit  that,  as  a  researcher,  I  can  struggle  with  this  at  times,  preferring  my  work  to  people,  but  since  my   time  at  the  EmailFactory  was  so  short,  I  wanted  to  make  as  many  connections  as  I  could.  A  company,   though  it  functions  as  a  cohesive  unit  (ideally  anyway),  is  made  up  of  individuals.  As  an  academic   researcher  I  knew  that  to  really  understand  the  company  for  purpose  of  my  dissertation,  I  needed  to   meet  as  many  of  the  people  in  it  as  I  could.  In  my  role  as  a  participant  observer,  who  took  part  in  the   actions  of  the  company,  I  needed  to  meet  this  people  in  order  to  perform  my  job.    

The  research  team  at  the  EmailFactory  stays  very  socially  connected  to  other  departments:  As   UX  lead,  Marcellus  sees  it  as  part  of  his  job  to  make  sure  “other  people  are  informed  of  what  another   person  is  doing  or  what  another  team  in  the  organization  is  doing.”  Mandy  and  Devon  came  to  the  UX   team  from  other  departments  and  their  histories  working  with  people  elsewhere  in  the  company   facilitate  these  connections  for  them.  The  two  other  researchers,  Geoff  and  Stryker,  weren’t  hired   internally  and  didn’t  have  ties  to  any  of  the  other  people  or  groups  in  the  company.  I  watched  as  they  all   regularly  spent  their  lunch  breaks  with  colleagues  from  other  departments  and  had  long  chats  with  folks   by  the  espresso  machines.  I  was  interested  to  know  why  Geoff  and  Stryker  made  such  efforts  to  meet   people  they  wouldn’t  ordinarily  work  with,  so  I  asked  them.  Independently  from  one  another  they  

shared  that  they  felt  like  there  was  so  much  they  could  learn  from  the  people  they  work  with.  They  want   to  understand  what  their  jobs  are  like  and  what  they  do.    

While  the  primary  audience  for  the  company  is  the  user,  the  primary  audience  for  the  research   team  is  the  rest  of  the  company.  They  serve  as  advocates  of  the  users,  communicating  data  to  the   developers,  the  designers,  the  stakeholders,  the  marketers,  the  technical  writers—anyone  who  is   involved  in  creating  the  experience  for  the  user.  For  the  UX  researchers,  getting  to  know  their  colleagues   is  getting  to  know  their  audience.  It  gives  them  a  chance  to  understand  how  they  work,  what  is  

important  to  them,  and  what  their  needs  are.  One  day,  I  told  Stryker  that  I  had  noticed  how  he  seemed   to  consciously  make  and  maintain  strong  connections  with  people  in  other  departments.  I  asked  him   why.  He  told  me,    

If  I  can  build  a  relationship  with  Carter  (one  of  the  Data  Scientists),  then  he’s  going  to   know  data  is  important  to  me.  Then  he  will  come  to  me  when  he  has  something  he   knows  will  help  me  do  my  job  better.  Same  with  Devon  when  she  was  in  Compliance.   Same  with  Collin  in  Support.  The  personal  relationship  shows  that  I’m  a  real  person  who   values  the  exchange  of  ideas.  

For  Stryker,  making  friendships  and  developing  relationships  with  people  in  different  departments   created  a  two-­‐way  channel  for  the  exchange  of  ideas.        

Asking  questions  and  learning  about  a  colleague’s  job  helps  the  researchers  know  the  kinds  of   information  their  colleague  needs  to  be  successful  in  their  work.  And  while  communicating  good,   relevant  is  important,  the  relationships  the  researchers  build  also  helps  make  their  audience  more   receptive  and  willing  to  listen.  It  establishes  a  relationship  and  builds  trust  so  that  when  the  researchers   challenge  something  or  suggest  a  new  way  of  doing  things,  tensions  aren’t  quite  so  high  and  people  

researchers  keep  each  other  honest.  “There  are  times  when  I  look  at  data  and  come  to  conclusions  that   are  completely  wrong  based  on  talking  to  users,  and  vice  versa  for  the  UI/UX  [team].  .  .”  They  challenge   each  other’s  data,  helping  each  other  think  critically  about  it  and  approach  problems  from  different   perspectives.  This  is  very,  very  valuable  to  a  company,  but  these  kinds  of  exchanges  wouldn’t  be  possible   without  the  relationships  that  both  teams  have  worked  to  establish  and  cultivate  and  establish.    

Forms  of  Communication  

A  significant  part  of  understanding  audience  is  understanding  the  best  medium  to  communicate   information  to  them  and  the  UX  team  has  been  experimenting  quite  a  bit  with  different  forms  of   delivery  for  their  research.  During  my  study,  I  saw  research  written  up  as  reports,  incorporated  in  to  a   poster,  turned  into  videos,  delivered  in  oral  presentations,  sent  out  in  newsletter-­‐type  emails,  and   talked  about  in  everyday  conversation.  The  following  section  is  a  breakdown  of  each  of  these  formats,   where  I’ll  describe  them,  the  purpose  they  serve,  and  the  effects  they  have  on  the  company.    

Reports  

“Report”  is  often  a  dreaded  word,  bringing  up  thoughts  of  long,  stuffy  documents  that  go   unread  before  being  banished  to  a  tall  metal  filing  cabinet.  Reports  at  the  EmailFactory  actually  have  a   different  fate.  To  my  amazement,  they  are  read.  Well,  maybe  not  read  all  the  way  through  and  not  by   everyone  .  .  .  but  they  were  read  and  their  lives  usually  didn’t  come  to  an  end  in  a  tall  metal  coffin,  filled   with  dividers,  tabs,  and  folders.    

At  the  conclusion  of  every  major  project,  the  research  team  writes  a  formal  report.  These   reports  have  the  standard  formalities,  like  a  title,  author,  figures,  and  references,  and  the  standard   sections,  like  executive  summary,  methods,  and  recommendations.  Like  most  reports,  they  are  rich  with   information,  but  they  are  casually  written,  with  clear  language  and,  at  times,  humor.  They  are  short,   usually  under  20  pages  long,  with  tables,  images,  and  charts.  And  although  all  reports  are  not  the  same,  

the  researchers  work  hard  to  infuse  them  with  narrative  elements.  Quotes  and  customer  stories  are   essential  elements  that  pull  all  of  the  details  together  and  put  a  human  “face”  to  the  facts.    

Reports  are  collaborative  efforts  in  the  UX  research  team.  The  one  or  two  people  responsible  for   the  project  will  be  begin  writing  the  report  in  Google  Docs.  After  working  to  make  sure  the  necessary   information  about  the  study,  the  study’s  outcomes,  and  the  researchers’  analysis  and  recommendations   are  included,  they  share  it  with  a  few  others  in  the  team  for  outside  opinions  and  perspective.  The   outside  readers  go  over  it,  using  the  comments  feature  to  point  out  areas  that  are  unclear,  suggest   changes  to  sections  that  might  need  more  information,  and  question  areas  they  may  not  agree  with.   This  back  and  forth  exchange  continues  between  the  authors  and  their  fellow  researchers  until  they  feel   it’s  clear  and  comprehensive  enough  to  be  sent  to  Marcellus.  He,  in  turn,  goes  over  it,  asks  additional   questions,  tweaks  language,  and  gives  input.  This  entire  process  can  take  place  over  several  days  or,  in   some  case,  just  a  long  afternoon.    

Once  everyone  agrees  that  the  report  clearly  explains  the  problem  they  set  out  to  explore  and   describes  the  findings  they  gathered  from  the  study,  the  research  team  invite  their  first  audience  to  the   doc.  Usually  this  audience  is  the  corporate  executives  and  possibly  the  team  leads—people  who  need  to   know  details  and  will  distill  the  information  to  their  teams.  Often,  new  conversations  will  start  through   the  comments  features,  with  questions  and  requests  for  follow  up  research.  Then,  the  report  often  lays   quiet,  while  people  decide  how  to  act  on  the  information.    

Reports’  secondary  audiences  are  actually  what  interested  me  the  most,  though.  As  new   projects  come  up,  older  reports  roll  back  around  as  starting  points,  providing  snapshots  of  what  the   team  knew  about  that  subject  at  that  particular  time.  For  example,  the  UX  design  and  development   team  has  been  working  on  redesigning  signup  forms  (the  forms  customers  place  on  their  website  or   Facebook  page  where  people  can  subscribe  to  their  emails).  The  current  forms  are  plain-­‐looking,  not  

easily  customizable,  and  users  aren’t  able  to  create  multiple  sign  up  forms  that  send  contacts  to  the   same  list.  Matt,  one  of  our  UX  designers,  has  been  working  on  this  project  and  shared  with  me  that  at   the  start,  he  was  sent  a  report  about  sign  up  forms  that  one  of  the  researchers  had  written  as  a  starting   point  to  familiarize  himself  with  the  work  that  needed  to  be  done.  

Matt  actually  likes  to  work  with  a  formally  written  report,  because  it  lets  him  dive  more  deeply   into  a  topic.  Rather  than  reading  it  from  a  computer  screen,  he  prints  it  out,  skims  through  it  to  catch   the  highlights,  then  reads  it  slowly  from  the  beginning.  Then  he  sets  the  report  aside  and  starts  working.   The  report  remains  on  his  desk  throughout  the  entire  project  so  he  can  occasional  browse  through  it.   Matt  prefers  face-­‐to-­‐face  conversation  over  reports,  but  he  told  me  that  he  knows  the  research  team  is   busy.  A  report  doesn’t  mind  being  returned  to  for  follow  up  questions.    

But  despite  the  fact  that  the  UX  team  takes  great  care  to  make  their  reports  clear,  easy  to  read,   and  interesting,  they  aren’t  the  best  way  to  distribute  information  to  a  large  group  of  people  in  different   departments.  Pages  of  text  can  be  dense  and  daunting.  Though  there  might  be  the  odd,  curious  soul   who  picks  up  a  report  simply  because  they  like  information,  most  people  won’t  take  the  time  unless  it’s   immediately  relevant  to  something  they’re  working  on.  And  at  a  company  like  the  EmailFactory,  even   the  “odd,  curious  soul”  is  likely  too  busy  to  just  leisurely  browse  through  documents.  With  this  in  mind,   the  UX  team  has  been  experimenting  with  new  ways  of  communicating  information,  such  as  posters,   videos,  company-­‐wide  “Insights”  email  reports,  coffee  hour  talks,  and  visual  reports.    

Posters    

The  first  time  I  walked  into  the  common  area  of  the  EmailFactory  offices,  five  beautiful,  framed   posters  immediately  caught  my  attention  (Figure  4.3).  They  were  bright,  and  colorful,  with  vibrant   backgrounds.  Each  featured  a  larger  than  life  image  of  a  person—three  men  and  two  women.  Under   each  of  the  images  was  a  name:  In  order,  Mario,  Eliza,  Fred,  Ada,  and  Andre.  I  stared  at  the  posters,  

mesmerized,  and  noticed  that  each  person  was  framed  by  descriptive  nouns  and  adjectives  in  funky   fonts:  

● Andre  is  educated,  mobile,  a  techie,  and  savvy.   ● Eliza  is  social,  inefficient,  busy,  and  smart.    

● Mario  is  a  problem  solver,  an  expert,  creative,  and  advanced.  

● Fred  is  a  control  freak,  cool,  resourceful,  and  a  power  user.  

● Ada  is  self-­‐reliant,  busy,  and  smart.    

  Figure  4.3  EmailFactory  persona  posters  

The  UX  research  team  conducted  a  large-­‐scale  customer  study  that  helped  them  develop  persons  for  the  people   who  use  the  EmailFactory  app.  They  had  posters  made  for  each  of  these  personas  and  hung  them  in  the  office   common  area  

I  puzzled  over  these  eye-­‐catching  posters,  wondering  where  they  came  from  and  what  they   meant.  As  I  studied  them  more  closely,  I  saw  pieces  of  paper  tacked  beneath  each  of  them.  Each  paper   had  snippets  of  customer  feedback,  taken  from  feedback  forms,  emails,  support  chat  transcripts,  and   tweets.  These  posters  weren’t  just  artistic  images  used  to  decorate  blank  wall  space.  They  were  the   customer  personas  of  the  EmailFactory,  the  archetypes  that  helped  represent  the  different  customers   the  company  served.  The  EmailFactory  had  just  released  a  complete  app  redesign  a  few  weeks  prior  to   my  arrival,  and  the  comments  on  the  papers  beneath  the  posters  were  real  pieces  of  feedback  (both   negative  and  positive)  about  the  redesign.  As  employees  filtered  through  the  common  area  to  make   coffee,  grab  a  snack,  eat  lunch,  or  shoot  some  pool,  curiosity  would  strike  them—just  as  it  did  me—and   they  would  pause  in  front  of  the  posters,  reading  feedback  on  their  work  from  the  perspective  of  each  of   their  five  major  user  groups.    

The  goal  of  these  posters  is  to  prompt  curiosity,  provoke  thoughts,  inspire  conversations,  and   invite  questions.  As  Marcellus  explained  to  me,  “These  posters  are  not  even  the  tip  of  the  iceberg  of  the   information  we  have.  But  it  makes  the  core  concepts  accessible  to  people  where  you  can  get  it  at  a   glance,  and  it  can  enable  a  conversation  about  these  different  types  of  customers.”  As  a  poster,  valuable   customer  information  comes  alive,  free  from  the  constraints  of  a  hard  drive,  filing  cabinet,  or  black  and   white  text  on  an  8x11  page.  A  poster  can’t  provide  the  detailed  information  of  a  report,  but  it  can  give   an  overview,  a  surface-­‐level  understanding  that  will  hopefully  prompt  people  to  dig  deeper  and  learn